What would you say if you saw this chart of vaxxed vs unvaxxed - across the board?

Question, Is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. plain crazy? Or is he crazy like a fox?... Originally Posted by Tiny

Welp... Instead of investigating his findings, the Oregon Medical Board suspended Dr. Thomas’s license just days after his study was published. Months later, the study was retracted.

But It's b-a-a-a-ck.

Bombshell Vax vs. Unvax Study Finally Sees the Light of Day — And the Results Are Staggering
by Vigilant Fox Oct. 13, 2025

Health journalist and film producer Del Bigtree has just released his new film An Inconvenient Study, which follows Bigtree’s years-long exchange with Dr. Marcus Zervos, head of infectious disease at Henry Ford Health in Detroit, a doctor who is about as pro-vaccine as they come.



In 2016, Dr. Zervos crossed paths with Bigtree, who urged him to take on something public health had avoided for decades: a study comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated children.

Dr. Zervos agreed, determined to prove Bigtree and other vaccine skeptics wrong. At the time, he vowed, “Whatever the results, they get published.”

Both the buried study and the film are now available for everyone to see.

Before diving into Zervos’s findings, the film laid out prior evidence raising serious questions about vaccine safety.

One striking example came from Dr. Peter Aaby. Once a vaccine believer, Dr. Aaby became a skeptic after discovering that the DTP vaccine he helped promote for African children led to 2.3 times higher mortality among the vaccinated.

Decades after launching the DTP program in Guinea-Bissau, Dr. Aaby realized only half the children there had received the shot — giving him a perfect comparative study between the vaccinated and unvaccinated.

The DTP vaccine did protect against diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis, but there was also more than a twofold increase in overall mortality. The results stunned Aaby, who now speaks openly about what he discovered.

“It’s important to recognize that no routine vaccine was tested for overall effect on mortality in randomized trials before being introduced. I guess most of you think that we know what our vaccines are doing. We don’t,” he now teaches...

Frightening, yet sobering, read, if you have the stomach for being censored and lied to by the Gas Lighting media.

Damn WYID, look at all those medical conditions! The plaintiffs lawyers are going to have a field day!

Thanks for the reminder to get my flu shot/COVID booster. I'm already up to date on DTP.

What would you say.... Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Welp. I would say:

Is there ANY limit to the junk science that will be promoted here?

It's tempting to just say "fuck it, I'm not wasting time on these misrepresented lies." But then again, when I consider the credibility of the poster and the source used, it will take virtually no effort

To paraphrase: Mount Up!

First up: Gateway Pundit. Little more needs to be said, really. But the idea that anyone would trust ANY health-related "news" from this click-bait pile of lies would be amusing if it was not so disturbing.

Second indicator: The person that GP calls "Health journalist and film producer Del Bigtree." I could stop there. But I'll elaborate. Out of spite and disrespect.

That lying fuck-wad was also the producer of " Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe" - which promoted the TOTALLY DISCREDITED work of Andrew Wakefield, the douchebag most responsible for the lie about a link between vaccines and autism. Bigtree used to be the former "Communications Director" for RFK, Jr. By itself, that should kill any credibility he ever might have had. But he's also the founder of ICAN - the Informed Consent Action Network, a major spreader of vaccine disinformation.

Final Nail: Lead-author of this "Bombshell" study Marcus Zervos. A true denier of the concept that Physicians should "first do no harm." This guy might look legit on paper, but he's a discredited, self-serving shill for ICAN.

Zevros' "study" was never released because he never submitted it for peer review! He has also never made any of it available, even as a pre-published abstract, until he got involved with this stupid fucking "documentary."

Peter Aaby does have a lot of credibility. Mostly around his work with "nonspecific effects" of vaccine (which are good things!). But he does not actively participate in the controversy the way Bigtree and GP imply.

Dr. Paul Thomas: license suspended after his discredited study was RETRACTED. Not Withdrawn. Retracted.

And the suspension? Indefinite.

As per the Washington Medical Commission: "Dr. Thomas surrendered his Oregon medical license due to unprofessional conduct; making false or misleading statements regarding the efficacy of treatments; and repeated gross negligence in the practice of medicine."

Please. Don't. Continue.

Lies like Bigtree and these unethical assholes promote are dangerous to societal health. Don't be a part of it.

What would I say if I saw that chart? That I need to either go to an optometrist or it is the equivalent of signing a contract in a language you do not read/speak.

Can't read a damn thing on it.

What would I say if I saw that chart? That I need to either go to an optometrist or it is the equivalent of signing a contract in a language you do not read/speak.

Can't read a damn thing on it. Originally Posted by Precious_b

Consider yourself lucky. The idea that these kinds of findings would be "covered up" and that people would be "fired immediately if they published it" is just more Conspiracy Theory foolishness.

The real goal here isn't to make you believe it. Or even question it. The real goal here is to discredit science and experts to the point where MAGA sycophants refuse to trust anything they are not told to trust by their leadership.

Then, of course, they criticize you for questioning it. Accuse you of being brainwashed, duped, misled. Denigrate your credibility also.

Wait for it.

(personally, I say bring it. WTF is taking so long? Let's have fun!)

Consider yourself lucky. The idea that these kinds of findings would be "covered up" and that people would be "fired immediately if they published it" is just more Conspiracy Theory foolishness.

The real goal here isn't to make you believe it. Or even question it. The real goal here is to discredit science and experts to the point where MAGA sycophants refuse to trust anything they are not told to trust by their leadership.

Then, of course, they criticize you for questioning it. Accuse you of being brainwashed, duped, misled. Denigrate your credibility also.

Wait for it.

(personally, I say bring it. WTF is taking so long? Let's have fun!) Originally Posted by Eaton Beaver

I ain't bothering to look at something so obscured that you can't read it. Means it can't stand on its own legs.

the link supplied is all I need to know. And, if it was him previously, if he disputes that its from somewhere else, just post the source of such. Than you can put the fluff afterwards.

Bombshell Vax vs. Unvax Study Finally Sees the Light of Day — And the Results Are Staggering
by Vigilant Fox Oct. 13, 2025 Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

From the Article in The Gateway Pundit,

"In nearly 2,000 unvaccinated ********, there were zero cases of ADHD, diabetes, behavioral problems, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, tics, or other psychological disorders."

Wow, that's impressive!!! But I'm confused. I thought Tylenol in pregnant women and the recently circumcised causes autism and ADHD. So none of 2000 unvaccinated ********'s Mom's took Tylenol? None of the roughly 1,000 that were male got circumsized and took Tylenol?

Oh, never mind, I figured it out. All the 2,000 participants in the study must have been Amish! No drugs, no vaccines!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZLb33uCg

Oh, err, never mind. It looks like the Amish are about as likely to have autism as everyone else. No vaccines, no drugs, they eat organic, and the only carbon fumes they're exposed to are from farm animal flatulence.

https://www.mastermindbehavior.com/p...ids-get-autism

I guess I'm just going to have to give up on this amateur science detective stuff, and go back to my true calling, male midget prostitute!

Damn WYID, look at all those medical conditions! The plaintiffs lawyers are going to have a field day!

Thanks for the reminder to get my flu shot/COVID booster. I'm already up to date on DTP. Originally Posted by Tiny

While one could ague that they did not place that graph with age or time horizon participants under study, I can still figure the subjects of the study have a much longer time horizon than any of us.

So there is that.

What would I say if I saw that chart? That I need to either go to an optometrist or it is the equivalent of signing a contract in a language you do not read/speak.

Can't read a damn thing on it. Originally Posted by Precious_b

Maybe a question better asked in the Technical Forum or to your optometrist?

...Thanks for the reminder to get my flu shot/COVID booster... Originally Posted by Tiny

Search for the phrase "control group" in the article. It's easy to overlook, even without Stage 5 TDS and even with glasses. That was where the magic happened, i.e. the AHA moment, in the study.

In the curios case of the covid, we both know a participant (from these here fora) that was in the initial control group for the covid gene therapy study.
Let me repeat that for the hard of hearing: ...that WAS in the initial control group...

Basically, they received the placebo. They are no longer in the "control group", though I hope they are still alive and kicking, just haven't seen them traipsing through the forums in a good long while.

I bet Speedracer will show up again before long. Besides he's a lightweight. I believe he's only had three or four gene therapy shots. I've had seven and I'm still alive and kicking.

Search for the phrase "control group" in the article.... Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Hey! WTF? I'm feeling left out here! I know it is more fun to talk to Tiny. I can't compete.

But still

NO response to any of my charges that the "article", the source of it, the "documentary", the people cited in it (most), the "study", etc. are all a bunch of blistering, misrepresented, bald-faced lies?

None?

NO defense of the lies sourced in Post #1? Good! That's the way it should be.

Meanwhile, they didn't purge everything truthful in NIH info yet:

Vaccines estimated to prevent 2 to 3 million deaths a year